On 4/28/09 10:41 AM, Hubert Le Van Gong wrote: > Is the reason for*discarding* this solution the fact that it's > an additional roundtrip in the flow (or put another way it's too big > a change to the current protocol)?
If this _is_ indeed the case, then perhaps its time to start drafting OAuth 2.0, which would include this significant change. -- Dossy Shiobara | [email protected] | http://dossy.org/ Panoptic Computer Network | http://panoptic.com/ "He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on." (p. 70) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OAuth" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/oauth?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
